On 5/10/24 14:33, Phil Stracchino wrote:
On 5/9/24 21:07, Marcin Haba wrote:
Runscript {
Runs When = After
Runs On Client = no
Console = ".bvfs_update jobid = %i"
}
Marcin, FYI I just tried this and it appears to have worked.
MySQL 127.0.0.1> SELECT table_name, table_rows,
On 5/9/24 21:07, Marcin Haba wrote:
Runscript {
Runs When = After
Runs On Client = no
Console = ".bvfs_update jobid = %i"
}
Marcin, FYI I just tried this and it appears to have worked.
MySQL 127.0.0.1> SELECT table_name, table_rows, data_length FROM
information_schema.tables W
> On Fri, 10 May 2024 14:00:42 -0400, Phil Stracchino said:
>
> On 5/10/24 13:39, Martin Simmons wrote:
> >> Column declared NOT NULL without DEFAULT (SQL99 violation)
> >
> > Where does SQL99 say that this is a violation for CREATE TABLE? You
> > mentioned
> > AUTO_INCREMENT previously, bu
> On Fri, 10 May 2024 14:04:50 -0400, Phil Stracchino said:
>
> On 5/10/24 14:01, Martin Simmons wrote:
> > But I think you are mixing two different concepts: in CREATE TABLE, a
> > DEFAULT
> > just specifies what INSERT does if the column is omitted; NOT NULL is a
> > constraint that applies
On 5/10/24 14:01, Martin Simmons wrote:
But I think you are mixing two different concepts: in CREATE TABLE, a DEFAULT
just specifies what INSERT does if the column is omitted; NOT NULL is a
constraint that applies all the time. It is quite reasonable to specify NOT
NULL for a column that must al
> On Fri, 10 May 2024 12:25:38 -0400, Phil Stracchino said:
>
> On 5/10/24 12:15, Phil Stracchino wrote:
> > On 5/10/24 07:40, Martin Simmons wrote:
> >> No, FileIndex is signed in the File table at least (-ve is used to mark
> >> deleted files in an accurate backup).
> >
> > Then should it n
On 5/10/24 13:39, Martin Simmons wrote:
Column declared NOT NULL without DEFAULT (SQL99 violation)
Where does SQL99 say that this is a violation for CREATE TABLE? You mentioned
AUTO_INCREMENT previously, but that is MySQL-specific.
I can't point you at the specific line, but I do know that
> On Fri, 10 May 2024 12:14:43 -0400, Phil Stracchino said:
>
> This is the documented/tested behavior for missing values in MariaDB
> 10.6 at least, which matches the *documented* behavior of MySQL 8.x:
> ...
> Column declared NULL with no DEFAULT
I think "declared NULL" is non-SQL99 anywa
> On Fri, 10 May 2024 12:15:07 -0400, Phil Stracchino said:
>
> On 5/10/24 07:40, Martin Simmons wrote:
> >> On Thu, 9 May 2024 14:45:31 -0400, Phil Stracchino said:
> >> It is an INT UNSIGNED NOT NULL (with no DEFAULT specified) in FileMedia,
> >> but it is a signed INT(11) in every other
On 5/10/24 12:15, Phil Stracchino wrote:
On 5/10/24 07:40, Martin Simmons wrote:
No, FileIndex is signed in the File table at least (-ve is used to mark
deleted files in an accurate backup).
Then should it not be signed *everywhere*? Or are these just a group of
disparate columns not used out
On 5/10/24 07:40, Martin Simmons wrote:
On Thu, 9 May 2024 14:45:31 -0400, Phil Stracchino said:
It is an INT UNSIGNED NOT NULL (with no DEFAULT specified) in FileMedia,
but it is a signed INT(11) in every other table where it exists. It is
inconsistently allowed to be NULL, has a DEFAULT speci
On 5/10/24 07:04, Martin Simmons wrote:
On Thu, 9 May 2024 14:45:31 -0400, Phil Stracchino said:
I'm seeing a LOT of columns either defined with a DEFAULT but allowed to
be NULL (in which case the DEFAULT will not be used because NULL is
allowed),
Are you sure the DEFAULT will not be used? I
> On Thu, 9 May 2024 14:45:31 -0400, Phil Stracchino said:
>
> I have noticed, or stumbled across, a lot of issues with column
> definitions. One such is FileIndex, which is not consistently defined:
>
>
>
> MySQL epsilon3> SELECT TABLE_NAME, COLUMN_TYPE, IS_NULLABLE,
> COLUMN_DEFAULT FR
> On Thu, 9 May 2024 14:45:31 -0400, Phil Stracchino said:
>
> I'm seeing a LOT of columns either defined with a DEFAULT but allowed to
> be NULL (in which case the DEFAULT will not be used because NULL is
> allowed),
Are you sure the DEFAULT will not be used? I think it will be used if th
On Thu, 9 May 2024 at 20:45, Phil Stracchino wrote:
> On 5/9/24 13:08, Marcin Haba wrote:
> > OK. I was thinking about step after, where files are selected and
> > restore is starting. For 263 files this slowness can not be too visible.
> > For restoring a larger set of files, it is.
> >
> > For
On 5/9/24 13:08, Marcin Haba wrote:
OK. I was thinking about step after, where files are selected and
restore is starting. For 263 files this slowness can not be too visible.
For restoring a larger set of files, it is.
For the building file list, there is used .bvfs_update command that
builds
On Thu, 9 May 2024 at 18:27, Phil Stracchino wrote:
> On 5/9/24 12:10, Marcin Haba wrote:
> > In this algorithm it does not matter if hardlinks exist or not because
> > examined are all file records. It is because to know if hardlink is used
> > or not for a file, Bacula has to decode Bacula LSta
On 5/9/24 12:10, Marcin Haba wrote:
In this algorithm it does not matter if hardlinks exist or not because
examined are all file records. It is because to know if hardlink is used
or not for a file, Bacula has to decode Bacula LStat string for this
file from the File table. And for many files i
On Thu, 9 May 2024 at 17:57, Phil Stracchino wrote:
> On 5/9/24 11:47, Marcin Haba wrote:
> > Hello Phil,
> >
> > For the slow Bacula restore, BAT the same as Baculum and Bacularis uses
> > Bacula Bvfs interface for doing restore. The Bvfs restore part
> > responsible for preserving hardlinks cau
On 5/9/24 11:47, Marcin Haba wrote:
Hello Phil,
For the slow Bacula restore, BAT the same as Baculum and Bacularis uses
Bacula Bvfs interface for doing restore. The Bvfs restore part
responsible for preserving hardlinks causes this slowness. Some time ago
I researched it a bit. The result tog
On Thu, 9 May 2024 at 17:12, Phil Stracchino wrote:
> On 5/9/24 04:39, Thomas Beierlein wrote:
> > Hi Phil,
> >
> > On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 02:29:01PM -0400, Phil Stracchino wrote:
> >> Just updated Bacula from 13.0.4 to 15.0.2 on Gentoo Linux. The update
> went
> >> smoothly and without issues
On 5/9/24 04:39, Thomas Beierlein wrote:
Hi Phil,
On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 02:29:01PM -0400, Phil Stracchino wrote:
Just updated Bacula from 13.0.4 to 15.0.2 on Gentoo Linux. The update went
smoothly and without issues aside from the build not running the DB update
script, which I had to do man
Hi Phil,
On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 02:29:01PM -0400, Phil Stracchino wrote:
> Just updated Bacula from 13.0.4 to 15.0.2 on Gentoo Linux. The update went
> smoothly and without issues aside from the build not running the DB update
> script, which I had to do manually.
>
>
> I found several issues
Just updated Bacula from 13.0.4 to 15.0.2 on Gentoo Linux. The update
went smoothly and without issues aside from the build not running the DB
update script, which I had to do manually.
I found several issues with that step.
First, update_mysql_tables simply complains:
The existing database
24 matches
Mail list logo
